Council Tax Band Review

uptdale

It might having worth a look at the official guidance for Valuation Officers to see whether they have followed the guidance:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/council-tax-manual

lincroft1710

Gustygoat said:

Hi,

Have been following this thread and similar ones with interest past few weeks and have now registered with the MSE forum as I'm in a similar situation to that of electribem and would welcome any advice on the best way to proceed with the VOA.

In a nutshell, I'm in North Wales and strongly feel my early 1900s four bed, but small detached house should be in Band E, not F. (I bought in 2022 so can only go down the informal review route)

This view is based on two far larger detached homes with six bedrooms and large gardens/drives front and rear dating back to a very similar period being in the lower band that are less than 100 metres from my property as the crow flies.

In addition, there are countless larger semi-detached houses from the same era also in the lower band in the immediate vicinity, including my next but one neighbour.

Having obtained my PAD from the VOA last month, I was shocked to see they have my home registered as being far bigger than it is; we're talking around 25-40% of extra internal space that simply doesn't exist and I can only think their records are based on the entire plot size (small garden at front and small patio at back), rather than that of the actual home.

As such, I was fairly confident of a successful outcome in my initial approach to the VOA, but they rejected my evidence of our floor space. I provided them with a copy of the EPC commissioned by the previous owner, as well as a sales brochure featuring the dimensions of all the rooms bar the only bathroom and adjacent toilet.

The VOA offered no guidance as to what evidence they would deem reliable, so I'm currently waiting callbacks from local chartered surveyors and architects so I can get a more accurate and "official" record and hope that will suffice so they can at least correct the PAD.

In addition to the above, I also sent Google Streetview images of the aforementioned detached homes but they dismissed that in an identical-worded email to that sent to electribem.

They simply said - and I take strong issue with this given the style and type are very, very similar: "Our records show that the list of properties you provided differ to your own in regard to style & type. Considering all the evidence available, we cannot consider these properties as comparable."

I'm now in the process of trying to find sales/price information from 2003 to support my case but, unfortunately, the two homes referenced have not been on the market for many years and so bar knocking on their doors and asking for dimensions, I have no way of obtaining the relevant data.

Like electribem, it seems the dice are loaded against us when it comes to proving our case. A simple drive or virtual tour of the area would show our property is by far the smallest in the 5-6 surrounding roads and I'm at a loss to see how the massive homes (which must be at least 50-60% bigger) round the corner can pay less CT than us.

Being a Conwy Council resident, CT has gone by 10% in recent years and 2025 is looking like a similar hike, so these are not insignificant sums.

For the record, I offered the VOA the opportunity to visit so they could see for themselves the incorrect PAD and view the other two houses within spitting distance, but they never referenced that in their reply.

Any advice would be welcomed.

GG

I don't know about the VOA in Wales, but in England we used external measurements not internal. So that is possibly where there is a discrepancy. If this is not the case then I suggest you use the official VOA complaints procedure bemoaning the fact that the VOA refuse to inspect your home when it would appear they have incorrect information about its size

Gustygoat

Many thanks for the replies Uptdale and Lincroft 1710, you've definitely given me some food for thought.

Our walls are fairly thick so that might account for some of the sizing discrepancy, but there should still be a big difference of around 35sqm between what the PAD states and what we believe the actual measurements are.

I should have clarified in my original post that while the estate agent brochure had most of the rooms' measurements (which match ones we've taken) they didn't feature the bathroom or toilet, so we measured them ourselves and added them to the final total.

I'll be emailing the VOA again this month so will update this thread with any news in due course; though appreciate that could be some time in the future given some of the comments on another thread highlighting delays.

Thanks again,

GG

lincroft1710

Gustygoat said:

Many thanks for the replies Uptdale and Lincroft 1710, you've definitely given me some food for thought.

Our walls are fairly thick so that might account for some of the sizing discrepancy, but there should still be a big difference of around 35sqm between what the PAD states and what we believe the actual measurements are.

I should have clarified in my original post that while the estate agent brochure had most of the rooms' measurements (which match ones we've taken) they didn't feature the bathroom or toilet, so we measured them ourselves and added them to the final total.

I'll be emailing the VOA again this month so will update this thread with any news in due course; though appreciate that could be some time in the future given some of the comments on another thread highlighting delays.

Thanks again,

GG

35 sq m could easily be the difference between Effective Floor Area (measurements of each room added together) and Gross External Area (which the VOA use). You would be surprised how much internal and external wall thicknesses, hallways, landings, corridors and staircases add up.

Gustygoat

lincroft1710 said:

Gustygoat said:

Many thanks for the replies Uptdale and Lincroft 1710, you've definitely given me some food for thought.

Our walls are fairly thick so that might account for some of the sizing discrepancy, but there should still be a big difference of around 35sqm between what the PAD states and what we believe the actual measurements are.

I should have clarified in my original post that while the estate agent brochure had most of the rooms' measurements (which match ones we've taken) they didn't feature the bathroom or toilet, so we measured them ourselves and added them to the final total.

I'll be emailing the VOA again this month so will update this thread with any news in due course; though appreciate that could be some time in the future given some of the comments on another thread highlighting delays.

Thanks again,

GG

35 sq m could easily be the difference between Effective Floor Area (measurements of each room added together) and Gross External Area (which the VOA use). You would be surprised how much internal and external wall thicknesses, hallways, landings, corridors and staircases add up.

Well, lincroft1710, we certainly were surprised by how much space the internal and external walls added up to. As such, we believe the PAD to be correct after all.

We are now trying to gather sales/pricing evidence of similar properties in our area that are in a lower band. Though this is time consuming, we are getting there slowly but surely.

Will update in due course.

GG